Paranormal TV: A Ghost of a Chance

During the past 2-3 years we've seen paranormal shows explode onto the scene of mainstream television in Prime Time spots. Sci Fi's (or SyFy if you so wish, sorry purists) Ghost Hunters being one of the first to gain national attention and popularity. Now we have Ghost Hunters International, Ghost Hunters Academy, Ghost Lab, Paranormal State, Ghost Adventures, Most Haunted (UK & USA), Paranormal Cops, Ghostly Encounters, the short lived (thankfully) Extreme Paranormal...and many more on the way I'm sure.

These shows bring attention to the subject, but is it always the kind of attention the subject needs? To produce a show and have it be a successful venture, it has to be entertaining. If it's not entertaining, it's destined for a short run, because advertisers won't buy commercials during the show.

So, can an elusive enigma be coupled with a consistently entertaining television show? Some within the paranormal fields say no. Does anyone actually think Ghost Hunters can actually obtain evidence at every place they visit for an investigation? In the early days, sometimes they didn't. These shows I found interesting on their own, due to them being a testament to the credibility of the program. These days that's a rarity with every show getting some sort of activity "documented". The success of the investigations seems to have escalated with the success and popularity of the show itself. I only ask the obvious: are we seeing staged data?

Ghost Hunters in particular, has had it's share of public accusation involving fakery or staged evidence. This started largely with the 2008 Live event at Fort Delaware (which I'll save the gory details for you to look up and read/watch yourself - Google it.). Many fans hotly contest that Ghost Hunters doesn't fake anything (and they very well may not), and the 2 stars of the show have commented here and there about the situation to try an resolve it. In my opinion, the explanations have fallen short. For me there's still unanswered questions.

One has to take all of these shows with a dose of salt and get back to reality. This is television - it's about advertising revenue and entertainment. The phenomena is elusive, and doesn't always present itself on demand (No matter how many time Ghost Adventures' Zack taunts spirits to "come up outta there and get us"). You may go out to a supposedly haunted location with all the equipment in the world, and get absolutely nothing. That's a well known fact. You may go 20 times and get nothing. That 21st time might yield an unexplainable piece of evidence. The idea that we watch week after week as a team goes out to investigate a haunted locale and obtain solid data is absurd when you really think about it. In the end, it might get people interested, and even involved, but it alludes to an ease of data gathering that often leaves the reality severely lacking. It also might result in such a deep-seated desire to capture evidence, that the public accepts any sound, video blip or camera aberration as "evidence".

In my opinion it damages serious field study whether it wants to or not, because this is the mass media with all it's attachments and contingencies. Ideas and theories put forth on these shows often effect the popular thought of those wanting to get involved actively - despite whether these theories actually have any merit or not.

Personally, I like Ghost Hunters. I watch it every week as well as it's spin-offs. However, I don't base any of my own ideas of theories off any television show - and more often then not I'm critical of the "evidence" put forth by any show. Is it possible there's some good data caught on these programs? Sure. With all of the equipment, and desirable locations afforded to TV productions you'd expect a certain amount of good captured evidence. Is it all good? I highly doubt it. This is not an effort to jump on the bandwagons of accusation upon any the shows, but rather that I've been involved in paranormal investigation for over 20 years and I'm all too familiar with the dangling carrot of evidence when it applies to any documentation of the paranormal.

The very focus of the subject is highly elusive. Otherwise we'd be overrun with solid data, and all the paranormal questions would be answered. The Paranormal could lose it's prefix and we could go on about daily life.

There is another way to look at all this though: the paranormal has always been mired in uncertainty and open ended questions. Are these shows any definitive change of this long standing current? Of course not. You might never know if the evidence you see on any Television show is solid or staged. Was that EVP really the dead speaking across the ether? Was it a crew member? Was it active staging or simple misinterpretation? Again, you have no real way of knowing.

The paranormal is doing what it does best: Hiding. But this time, in plain sight.

If good data is captured by any of these programs, it'll be marginalized by any that seem staged or too good to be true. The layman can't tell the difference, and often the seasoned researcher even has difficulty in separating wheat from chaff in some of these instances. You're along for the investigation - but only what the editor deems worthy of your eyes for the premise of the program. I don't know about you, but that's not what I'm after. I want it all, the truly bizarre with the mind numbing boredom.

But, that's not good TV.

Paranormal investigation can be fun, interesting, and fruitful. It can also be tedious, expensive, fruitless and so boring you'd rather stick needles in your eyeballs then go out to the Jones Farm yet another night to run cameras and do EVPs (if only to name a couple activities for the brevity of this article).

So are these shows worthless? I think of them as a double edged sword. Yes they bring attention to the paranormal, and even in some ways make it a lot easier for people to discuss these issues publicly. That this subject is now in the public eye and in abundance is fantastic - the more eyes on a mystery the more chances of getting somewhere with it. They also inspire people to get involved. That's great too.

But they also paint what I see as an unrealistic expectation of the enigma they search for, as if it manifests on demand, and is readily accessible.

There's also the issue of influence. Because they are public figures, their words carry weight with the less informed, and sway public opinion - and I don't believe that this "influence" is always treated with as much respect as it should be.

Out of all of the shows, I think Ghost Lab gives the most reassurance in the beginning of the program by stating nothing is fabricated - what you see is what you get. More of these shows would do well to adopt this policy. You may like the show or not, but so far as I have seen they are the only ones who have made this step towards accountability. And that's what it's all about. To be accountable for your evidence, and to treat the subject with honesty and integrity. If your data is solid it will hold up. If it's not, then let's not muddy the waters further than they already are.

But, then there's that pesky issue of ratings, advertising, and marketability. Is there a happy middle ground? I don't know.

What are any of these shows really accomplishing? Some go into the investigation with the idea that "we're going to help this family", when in fact past telling said family there's nothing to fear or "take back your home"...the bottom line is this is all an unknown. You can't provide help because you don't know what's going on to begin with. It might work, or it might not. But, I see a false sense of security.

Are they providing credible data that leads to deeper issues? No. Week after week it's "this is real". Yeah. We get it. So what about those deeper issues? Are the EVPs you get evidence of spirits of the departed within a structure, or are they a dilation of time we cannot understand? Are we able to talk to the past by sheer intention? Are we the "ghosts" to the "ghosts"? What connection is there to the witnesses and their state that could be manifesting activity?

If you wait for a TV show like that, you'll be a ghost before it happens. No one can come up with those answers, but can we not give the audience something to think about? To take it to the next level? Apparently not. But we can show endless green night vision scenes of creepy houses while you curl up with a bucket of popcorn, and a blanket.

And maybe that's all we want.